Rajasthan HC rejects Bail to REET Paper Leak Accused Ram Kripal Meena
Allahabad HC Reserves Verdict on Muslim Parties' Plea Against Varanasi Court Order
Jharkhand HC Announces 55 Assistant Positions in Ranchi; Online Applications Now Open!
Sister-in-Law's Frequent Visits Insufficient to Establish Residence in DV Case : Bombay HC
P&H HC Grants Interim Bail to Eight-Month Pregnant Woman Accused in Murder Case, Citing Health Risks to Mother and Unborn Child
Kerala HC Denies 'Non-Creamy Layer' Certification Plea, Citing Ineligibility Based on Hereditary Occupation Criteria
ED Shifts Sameer Wankhede's Money Laundering Case to Delhi, Informs Bombay HC
J& H HC Emphasizes Due Process, Slams Overuse of Preventive Detention under PSA
Madras High Court Quashes FIR Against Journalist Abhijit Majumder Over Periyar Remarks
Calcutta HC Takes Suo Motu Action on Alleged Sexual Assault and Land Transfer in Sandeshkhali
SC Voices Discontent over Registry's Failure to Include All Case Orders in Files

SC Voices Discontent over Registry's Failure to Include All Case Orders in Files

Recently, the Supreme Court expressed its discontent regarding the lack of action from its Registry to rectify the default of not including all case orders in the case file.

The division bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan emphasized that despite multiple orders highlighting the issue to the Registry, no corrective measures have been taken to address the default of omitting case orders from the case file.

The Court instructed the Court Master to send a copy of this order to the Secretary General of the Supreme Court. This isn't the first instance where the Supreme Court has voiced dissatisfaction with the performance of its Registry.

Just last week, a bench led by Justice JK Maheshwari sought an explanation from its Registrar (Judicial) regarding the listing of a case without adhering to the appropriate procedure.

Earlier, a bench presided over by Justice Abhay S Oka expressed disappointment when a civil appeal, as per directive, was scheduled for Thursday but ended up being listed on Friday. Justice Oka remarked orally, "What is concerning is that certain staff members have disregarded the judicial order specifying the listing of the civil appeal."

Additionally, a bench led by Justice (Retd.) Aniruddha Bose reprimanded the Registry for failing to list a matter concerning Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd. despite a judicial directive to do so on January 23, 2024.

In another instance, Justice Oka criticized the Registry last year for attempting to shift responsibility onto court masters for not complying with the court's orders, describing it as a'very sorry state of affairs'.

Case Title: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. SARVABHOUM BAGALI, DIARY NO. - 48593/2023

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy